Munoz: Blade Runner 1982/1991

Both Blade Runner renditions represent in someway the novel of Philip K. Dick though the one that best represents and conveys the message is the directors cut. “Blade runner had overcome the stigma of its disappointing performance”(Pfeiffer 126) Ridley Scott felt a great disappointment with the ending scene and having the voice overs of Rick Deckard’s beliefs and what he was thinking throughout the film. Scott as well added something’s that hinted on the whole mystery of Deckard being either human or android.

            I believe that in the novel Deckard is no doubt a human considering his passion of getting an animal to change his status and the care and passion he has towards them. As well as the relationship he has with his wife gives us the idea of him as a human, rather in the movie the wife is not present making us believe that the memory of her wife can be just planted to his brain but in reality never had a wife, thus the connection he has with Rachel.

            In the Directors cut film Scott adds a dream of a unicorn, which Deckard has after killing an android and later drinking, in his piano. This dream helps us understand what later in the movie is revealed. Gaff the other agent loves to make origami from matches and paper and leaves it in the rooms that he has been in as saying “I’ve been here”. The last origami he made was a unicorn and it was left at Deckard’s place before he escapes with Rachel to somewhere they can’t get to her and kill her. In the original film 1982 there wasn’t this dream which the unicorn origami was meaningless just showing that Gaff was alright with the relationship, but in the directors cut it hints” Deckard was indeed a replicant, because Gaff had access to his programmed dream and memories” (Pfeiffer 126) this for one ruined my whole intrigue of Deckard being a human or an android which the best part is not knowing.

            The voice over is one thing that I didn’t mind it was taken off. Voice over unless it isn’t at all clear then it shouldn’t be in a movie because it just makes it very annoying that they have to tell you things that are pretty clear to the audience. If they cant portray it by acting and expressing it out then I guess they aren’t doing a good job if they can’t convey the message without having a voice over.

            Finally the last scene in the 1982 film is something illogical for the whole idea of a post apocalyptic world and after nuclear radiation ruining the whole world how can there be still green and a happy paradise outside that dark and gloomy place if everyone would see that that is how its outside that environment everyone would jus pick their hovering car and leave. Anyway I do understand that it was made for the whole purpose of having the happy ending and making Rachel be different and perhaps having longer than four years just changes the whole fact of reality and fakeness and what made it for someone to differentiate. Thus the better ending is of the directors’ cut where it ends with the closing elevator leaving the mystery to the audience. I guess I prefer the Directors cut though I’m not that fascinated for the fact that they are showing Deckard as an android instead of leaving us with the mystery.